olympics

Got anything else on your mind that isn't about the Warriors? If you do, this is the place to post.
cpwigan
Posts: 31247
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:03 pm

Re: olympics

Post by cpwigan »

Golf is another sport that does not belong in the Olympics.
Owd Codger
Posts: 5628
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:20 am

Re: olympics

Post by Owd Codger »

medlocke wrote:
Whelley Warrior wrote:The Olympics concept has been ruined by the introduction of professionalism in sports like individuals in Tennis and team sports like Football and Rugby Union.

And is it fair that the BBC has to have all day coverage on all three of its television channels when many license payers who might not be interested in the Olympics are not getting any real alternative and the main rival ITV is showing nothing else but repeats.

And then there is the question of how much money is now spent on staging the Olympic's in countries like Brazil when there is much bad poverty.

Even the each day highlights of the games are for near three hours.

Now, like everything else in major sport, it is now all about making money for those running it!
Are you a fan of the Olympics WW?
Not as much as I use to be as the concept of the Olympics is supposed to be about Amateurism and not team games like Football and Rugby who have their own competitions and also not about Professionals from sports like Tennis, who apart from they too having their own competitions, are earning more than than many of the other competitors ever earn.

What next, the Professional Boxers replacing the Amateurs and Professional Golfers taking part?

At the same time true Olympic sports like Greco-Roman Westling have been dropped from the games.

Then there is the question of millions being spent on the games every four years in countries which like Brazil which are steeped in mass poverty!

Sutty
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:37 pm

Re: olympics

Post by Sutty »

Nezza Faz wrote:Just as a side issue, why are we (UK) so brilliant across the board at the individual sports, yet so pathetic at our team games.

Soccer done nothing on the international stage for decades (despite all their riches), ru had a hopeless world cup in the UK (and terrible in the final of the Olympic 7's). I can't think of any other major team sport that's been a success?

But we're currently second in the world at the Rio games with mostly individual efforts. Is it down to 'bottle', coaching, techniques, or what; or do we have the completely wrong attitude/character within our team sports ?

Be interesting to have a "take" on this.

And by the way, that Inverdale is a RL "hater" along with the journalist, Stephen Jones.
I think it's because of the amount of funding in lots of different sports these days. If you look back to the Atlanta olympics just 20 years ago we were waaaaay down the medals table with 1 gold, 8 silver and 6 bronze. Since then, Sport England has pumped millions into loads of different sports, which has allowed the potential of many youngsters to be achieved.

Compare this with team sports were professionalism is already there and the sums that the pro footballers and RU players can earn, they probably have little interest or motivation in reaching what I consider to be the pinnacle of sports (the Olympics).

Plus, the success of previous olympians and sportsmen. Brad Wiggins, the Brownlee's etc etc. As they say, success breeds success. Although it's largely down to the injection of cash by Sport England, in my opinion. Improved facilites, better coaches, funding to send British coaches on top level coaching courses ETC.

Then there's the advancements made in technology, whether it's equipment used, research being done to squeeze out tiny percentages of extra performance, or even the way that things are analysed. As Dave Brailsford says, it's all about marginal gains.

The politics of this country may leave a lot to be desired, but as a keen sportsman myself, these Olympics have made me proud to be British, no matter what the sport or whether I think it should be included in the Olympics or not. They're all out there to represent GB and get to the very pinnacle of their chosen sports.


markill
Posts: 3675
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:50 pm
Contact:

Re: olympics

Post by markill »

Nezza Faz wrote:Just as a side issue, why are we (UK) so brilliant across the board at the individual sports, yet so pathetic at our team games.

Soccer done nothing on the international stage for decades (despite all their riches), ru had a hopeless world cup in the UK (and terrible in the final of the Olympic 7's). I can't think of any other major team sport that's been a success?

But we're currently second in the world at the Rio games with mostly individual efforts. Is it down to 'bottle', coaching, techniques, or what; or do we have the completely wrong attitude/character within our team sports ?

Be interesting to have a "take" on this.

And by the way, that Inverdale is a RL "hater" along with the journalist, Stephen Jones.
Funding is a massive factor. At the 'elite' level UK Sport funding is allocated on a medal basis, and I think until recently that has been Olympics only but they now add in world championship, Europeans, commonwealth etc into the mix. In the 'individual' sports there are more opportunities to get a medal, so in track & field, cycling, gymnastics etc there is more chance of winning more medals therefore getting funding than in say hockey or basketball.

I think funding was withdrawn at the 'elite' level almost entirely for a number of team sports that didn't perform in London, when as host nation we entered more teams so gave them all a bit of funding in the lead up.

It could be argued though that cycling, rowing etc have all spent their money well to make marginal gains whereas it's not that easy to do that in some team sports.
in the world of mules, there are no rules

LATEST PODCAST EPISODE
https://www.spreaker.com/user/superleaguepod
Wandering Warrior
Posts: 3108
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm

Re: olympics

Post by Wandering Warrior »

Whelley
Are cyclists, gymnasts and athletes not professionals?
If you removed professionalism from the Olympics you'd finish up with clay pigeon shooting and sailing!
That would swallow the viewers up from Corrie!?!
When John Byrom plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints - Jimmy Armfield
SJ
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:46 pm

Re: olympics

Post by SJ »

Correct WW. They should have plough racing and Pigeon Tossing. Not many know this WW. I'm the best tosser in Devon. Keep it between us.

Cavandish going for gold 8pm BBC1
Wandering Warrior
Posts: 3108
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm

Re: olympics

Post by Wandering Warrior »

Bolton 27th in medal table with one event remaining! #GOKENNY
When John Byrom plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints - Jimmy Armfield
Owd Codger
Posts: 5628
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:20 am

Re: olympics

Post by Owd Codger »

Wandering Warrior wrote:Whelley
Are cyclists, gymnasts and athletes not professionals?
If you removed professionalism from the Olympics you'd finish up with clay pigeon shooting and sailing!
That would swallow the viewers up from Corrie!?!
So you think it is right that big money earners from sports like Tennis which have its own big competitions should be allowed into the Olympics.

Athletes, Gymnasts and some Cyclists may be Professional but they get peanuts compared to the likes of Tennis players like Andy Murray and Nadal.

According to your thinking, Professional Boxers should also be allow to participate, but there lies the problem, they have to be Amateur according to the Olymypic Committee.

So is it fair that any full time Professionals should be allowed to compete against part time Amateurs?

In my opinion, the Olympics and and indeed the Commonwealth games should be confined to Amateurs and part time Professionals only and those who spend the whole of their time as full time Professionals should not be allowed to participate as it lessons the chances of the others to win medals.
cow yeds
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:42 am

Re: olympics

Post by cow yeds »

cpwigan wrote:Golf is another sport that does not belong in the Olympics.
Why??
Wandering Warrior
Posts: 3108
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm

Re: olympics

Post by Wandering Warrior »

Whelley Warrior wrote:
Wandering Warrior wrote:Whelley
Are cyclists, gymnasts and athletes not professionals?
If you removed professionalism from the Olympics you'd finish up with clay pigeon shooting and sailing!
That would swallow the viewers up from Corrie!?!
So you think it is right that big money earners from sports like Tennis which have its own big competitions should be allowed into the Olympics.

Athletes, Gymnasts and some Cyclists may be Professional but they get peanuts compared to the likes of Tennis players like Andy Murray and Nadal.

According to your thinking, Professional Boxers should also be allow to participate, but there lies the problem, they have to be Amateur according to the Olymypic Committee.

So is it fair that any full time Professionals should be allowed to compete against part time Amateurs?

In my opinion, the Olympics and and indeed the Commonwealth games should be confined to Amateurs and part time Professionals only and those who spend the whole of their time as full time Professionals should not be allowed to participate as it lessons the chances of the others to win medals.
We live in different times than when you were a lad, you have to accept that the world is changing and people go into sport to set themselves up for life!
It's no good having a green eyed monster in your back shed just because you failed to achieve or the opportunity to achieve riches wasn't there in your time!
Remember you voted for Little England, life moved on before going backwards as requested by some.
Perhaps you could start a campaign to get the Olympics to revert back to amateurism?
At least media coverage will be on a lesser scale and I won't have to chose whether to watch Corrie or cycling!!
When John Byrom plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints - Jimmy Armfield
Locked